| 1 |
Hi! |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 4 |
> On 25 March 2013 09:30, Tobias Klausmann <klausman@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > I'll say it again: if we don't make install media anymore and |
| 6 |
> > tell people to use SRCD instead, we will lose installation |
| 7 |
> > support for at least alpha, ppc/64, hppa and ia64. As for sparc, |
| 8 |
> > mips and arm, there _might_ be alternatives, but I'm not aware of |
| 9 |
> > them. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> We can suggest SRCD as an alternative just for the amd64/x86 isos |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
WFM. Note that I _agree_ that all the install image building is |
| 15 |
eating time and is a source for errors. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Thing is, if we only build them for fringe archs, we might run |
| 18 |
into the "oh well, it's just for those few dozen users, it |
| 19 |
doesn't matter if it's slightly broken" effect. Even though the |
| 20 |
images were broken for the mainstream, it took quite a while (and |
| 21 |
a longish thread) for them to be fixed/taken care of. Imagine if |
| 22 |
they'd only been broken for ppc64 and alpha. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
While my arch team (alpha) is very lucky to have armin76 taking |
| 25 |
good care of the images, not all of them have somebody like him |
| 26 |
(who seems to have 36h-days and never sleeping). And if we drop |
| 27 |
support for the ISO on amd64/x86, fewer people will probably care |
| 28 |
about it, putting more strain on the already thinly-spread arch |
| 29 |
teams to fix stuff and track upstream package changes. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Recommending SRCD as an alternative sounds fine by me, especially |
| 32 |
for the sheer volume of possible hardware combinations in |
| 33 |
amd64-land. But we should still think of our own ISOs as |
| 34 |
something supported on all arches we want to offer. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Regards, |
| 37 |
Tobias |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
"Brain, konban wa nani o shimashitai?" |
| 41 |
"Your Japanese is terrible, Pinky." |
Archives